Jobs Support Register

Why do we need immune golds back. Constructively. A zero negativity thread.

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
#41
I think removing gold immunity was the right move for the game. A card like Borkh is really well balanced right now, making it immune would be way too strong and game defining.

But I think the OPs complaint is not without reason. Many golds are too vulnerable right now, and it makes long-term value strategies too weak. For example, I think that no* gold (engine) should be removable by Alzur's Thunder. (*Okay, of course there are always exceptions. But this should be the normal.) You want to remove my Triss: Butt, fine, but at least use a lock or a special removal card, or even two damage dealers. Even Ciri: she is a harder card to balance, and if she is too resilient she can become auto-include again, but I also feel they should make her survive at least a freaking thunder. They already went that way with Yen:Con, and I think maybe a 10 strength TB would be too strong, but no reason not to make her 8+2 armor.

I also feel that while they removed gold immunity as a rule, they should introduce immunity to some golds, Ciri: dash being the most obvious example. (And it would even be super flavorful!) Maybe even giving vanilla Geralt immunity would make him not so trash tier. (And it would be funny that he would then be exactly the same as in Witcher 3 Gwent.)
 
Last edited:

DRK3

User
#42
In some ways i agree - there was another depth of tactics back when Golds were (partly) immune. Yes, there were also other problems that were fixed by removing it, but new ones came, that were mentioned by OP.

My main problem is with the cards they didnt adjust for this new system. I will focus on one that is one of my favourites and hasnt been mentioned:

Ciri

This card used to be a staple in so many decks, one of the best Neutral Golds, which makes sense, since Ciri is the most important character in Witcher, after Geralt. Now, with all this removal, no one plays her anymore since all it takes is a stupid thunder and she's gone, making silver spies way safer to get CA. Which means a silver is better than a gold, which shouldnt happen.

If CDPR doesnt want Gold Immunity back, at least fix all these cards like Ciri, Triss But, Yen:Con and Villentretenmerth (yes i can spell that without checking!) to be respectable Golds.
 

BornBoring

User
#43
Keep in mind that this thread was started nearly 6 months ago and many gold cards are still close too unplayable....

Gold Immunity was problematic, so they removed it instead of tweaking it.
Sadly this design approach seems to be CDPR's goto-move....

That's why I quit playing the game. Call me if rows matter again....



 
Last edited:

TweetyLeaf

User
#44
The basic problem I see is this.

1. You either go point spam deck that has very limited synergy other than generate strenght to your units, by this I mean you do not need "engine" cards or combos that are vulnerable.
Elven swap deck would be good example.

2. You go towards removal, add 3 AT's, Scorch etc.
ST scorch deck, NR AT deck, NG alchemy.

Those are the viable decks around at this time.

None of them require you to play long combinations and get cards that has fun synergies, you all know what I am talking about here.

Scorch and removal is a big problem because it does not only push the game "I will remove all" mentality, it also pushes the game towards "I will spam more".
The combo's and synergies have become obsolete, and it kills the fun that Gwent had.


Really we need to do something about this.
 

Noela

User
#45
TweetyLeaf;n10530322 said:
1. You either go point spam deck that has very limited synergy other than generate strenght to your units, by this I mean you do not need "engine" cards or combos that are vulnerable. Elven swap deck would be good example.
2. You go towards removal, add 3 AT's, Scorch etc. ST scorch deck, NR AT deck, NG alchemy.
Those are the viable decks around at this time.
None of them require you to play long combinations and get cards that has fun synergies, you all know what I am talking about here.
Scorch and removal is a big problem because it does not only push the game "I will remove all" mentality, it also pushes the game towards "I will spam more". The combo's and synergies have become obsolete, and it kills the fun that Gwent had.
Really we need to do something about this.
1. I remember people on this forum saying that bronze cards power creep would be a problem, and they were right. Also, create is a problem that goes hand in hand with it. You have mentioned Elven Swap. I've been playing mulligan SC since mulligan exists, and that deck was never a problem. You needed a very good Ele'yas, or a movement mix to make it more or less reliable. But now, bronze cards are too powerful, and cards like Half-Elven Hunter and Elven Scouts vomit units in the board to be buffed. And I really think that mulligan needed some love back then, but not this.

2. Monster consume, Harald decks, Ciri: Nova decks that are everywhere...

The problem is not removal, the problem is that point spam makes removal a must.

As for Gold inmunity, I don't understand why in the actual state of things gold units have low strength. Easily removed, and those who need to be in the board because they don't generate inmediate tempo are screwed. But it would not be difficult to slap the "inmune" tag in some of those cards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.